An interesting article from Paulo Vitor Damo De Rosa about how modern is basically just one fair deck that is absurdly powerful and unfair decks, which leads to the power of the sideboard, high variance, and an overall bad format. I actually tend to agree with him:
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/the-problem-with-modern/
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 16, 2015, 05:38:17 PM
I think it's nonsense really and 20 card sideboard? That's the most daft idea so far. He even admitted being biased about modern from the start and his unbannings are equally as silly. Bad article from my point of view.
Thank you for offering absolutely no constructive material whatsoever.
I always felt the true mark of a great deck was being versatile enough to win against multiple styles of opponents without a sideboard
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 16, 2015, 04:16:08 PM
An interesting article from Paulo Vitor Damo De Rosa about how modern is basically just one fair deck that is absurdly powerful and unfair decks, which leads to the power of the sideboard, high variance, and an overall bad format. I actually tend to agree with him:
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/the-problem-with-modern/
My biggest issue is that 20 cards can lead to unfair decks siding into a completely different deck for game 2
My biggest issue is that 20 cards can lead to unfair decks siding into a completely different deck for game 2
[/quote]
20 cards is easily enough to swap an entire color
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 16, 2015, 06:20:17 PM
My biggest issue is that 20 cards can lead to unfair decks siding into a completely different deck for game 2
20 cards is easily enough to swap an entire color
[/quote]
^this
If you really would need 20 cards in your sideboard, then that should be saying something about your deck...
Every game format is fundamentally broken. The easiest piece of proof is the lists of "must have" cards. Standard, modern, legacy, it's all the same crap. Commander is the worst of all. They are all broken. But that's because the cards are good enough to break. I say unban everything and let the chips fall where they will
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 16, 2015, 06:43:38 PM
Every game format is fundamentally broken. The easiest piece of proof is the lists of "must have" cards. Standard, modern, legacy, it's all the same crap. Commander is the worst of all. They are all broken. But that's because the cards are good enough to break. I say unban everything and let the chips fall where they will
I have to disagree a little. I think all cards can be broken. I agree with you on the unban but I would say either restrict them or don't allow them with tHeir combo parts. Example. Melira can't be played with creatures that have persist
The article seems to contain a significant amount of bias. A 20 card sideboard will never happen, he knows that right? We still have a limited sample as far as modern stands post banning..
idk as an affinity player I just anticipate a lot of hate, and if someone wants to keep a 6 land hand and 1 stony fine by me. Modern is a format I play to have fun... He seems more focused on winning (which makes sense since he is a pro).
Then no combos should be played. It's unfair to decide that some combos are good and some aren't. All my friends felt that me using 2 {sterling grove} was unfair but didn't care that I played {draco} and {dralnu's pet} until I discovered the combo. Someone discovers that a couple cards go together, and we bemoan the broken combo. We either have to let all combos be, or ban them all
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 16, 2015, 05:56:09 PM
I always felt the true mark of a great deck was being versatile enough to win against multiple styles of opponents without a sideboard
Which is just impossible in this format which includes turn 1 and 2 wins and non-interactive decks.
Quote from: Cender on February 16, 2015, 06:04:19 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 16, 2015, 04:16:08 PM
An interesting article from Paulo Vitor Damo De Rosa about how modern is basically just one fair deck that is absurdly powerful and unfair decks, which leads to the power of the sideboard, high variance, and an overall bad format. I actually tend to agree with him:
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/the-problem-with-modern/
My biggest issue is that 20 cards can lead to unfair decks siding into a completely different deck for game 2
It was already happening in the 15 card system, Jeskai Ascendency decks were sideboarding into Gifts decks. It honestly is fair because for every combo decks sideboarding into something else, you have a fair deck that can pack more silver bullets against it.
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 16, 2015, 06:29:06 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 16, 2015, 05:45:09 PM
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 16, 2015, 05:38:17 PM
I think it's nonsense really and 20 card sideboard? That's the most daft idea so far. He even admitted being biased about modern from the start and his unbannings are equally as silly. Bad article from my point of view.
Thank you for offering absolutely no constructive material whatsoever.
Unlike yourself which you just said you agreed with the article. Please grow up. I already said 20 card sideboard is silly and the nature of modern will always result in bannings/unbannings. You don't like criticism don't post.
Sorry, I'm sure the Pro Tour winner knows nothing about this game, and I should have taken your opinion, the random person on the internet, into higher esteem. His ideas for unbans for actually quite popular (and have been) around various communities and he makes a lot of good points, even if his 20 card sideboard idea is a little out there. But of course, your comment of 'this is stupid' with no explanations is more important than the thought out and well reasoned ideas of a professional Magic player, so we might as well just read your comment.
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 16, 2015, 06:43:38 PM
Every game format is fundamentally broken. The easiest piece of proof is the lists of "must have" cards. Standard, modern, legacy, it's all the same crap. Commander is the worst of all. They are all broken. But that's because the cards are good enough to break. I say unban everything and let the chips fall where they will
No, this is just a horrible idea. Even the most liberal anti-banlisters don't want stuff like {Skullclamp} in the format.
Quote from: imthelolrus on February 16, 2015, 06:59:43 PM
The article seems to contain a significant amount of bias. A 20 card sideboard will never happen, he knows that right? We still have a limited sample as far as modern stands post banning..
idk as an affinity player I just anticipate a lot of hate, and if someone wants to keep a 6 land hand and 1 stony fine by me. Modern is a format I play to have fun... He seems more focused on winning (which makes sense since he is a pro).
He does have a lot of bias, and the 20 cards is a little out there, but I think the overarching idea that games shouldn't be so heavily based on variance and should be more based on skill is completely correct. There are too many linear decks that die to silver bullets and not enough fair decks.
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 16, 2015, 07:07:27 PM
Then no combos should be played. It's unfair to decide that some combos are good and some aren't. All my friends felt that me using 2 {sterling grove} was unfair but didn't care that I played {draco} and {dralnu's pet} until I discovered the combo. Someone discovers that a couple cards go together, and we bemoan the broken combo. We either have to let all combos be, or ban them all
It's pretty clear at this point that you don't play modern. What we are talking about here isn't getting rid of combo, we are talking about shaping the format such that we have more "fair decks" so that games aren't so heavily decided upon the variance involved with silver bullets in our sideboards.
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 16, 2015, 07:14:04 PM
Quote from: imthelolrus on February 16, 2015, 06:59:43 PM
The article seems to contain a significant amount of bias. A 20 card sideboard will never happen, he knows that right? We still have a limited sample as far as modern stands post banning..
idk as an affinity player I just anticipate a lot of hate, and if someone wants to keep a 6 land hand and 1 stony fine by me. Modern is a format I play to have fun... He seems more focused on winning (which makes sense since he is a pro).
Probably hates losing as well, I still think modern is quite diverse. Adjusting to meta and rogue decks (which I love) is all part of the game.
Adjusting to the meta is certainly a part of the game, and no one is arguing against it, what is being argued for is a format in which players can justify playing fair decks that don't lose to silver bullets, thus leading to a more interesting format.
I love skullclamp
That article was great. I like the idea of 20 card sideboard. And his unbanning ideas should be tested before we dismiss them.
I like playing the fair decks in modern. We need more of them so modern is a more skill based format that luck of the draw.
Quote from: Teysa karlov on February 17, 2015, 04:29:26 AM
That article was great. I like the idea of 20 card sideboard. And his unbanning ideas should be tested before we dismiss them.
I like playing the fair decks in modern. We need more of them so modern is a more skill based format that luck of the draw.
I'd argue that a lot of the unfair decks are skill testers just as much as the fair ones, but I agreed on the good draw comment.
I think this will always be a problem in eternal formats. Occasionally it happens in standard. The point I am getting at is it is hard to comprehend how combinations of 60 cards will interact with one another compared to other 60 card combinations and so on.
Need a non 60 card deck to win
Change everything
We could always bring back 40 card decks haha
Quote from: Taysby on February 17, 2015, 11:53:24 AM
Would tron be classified as fair? It's just some creatures, walkers, and boardwipes. No combos or anything.
There is nothing fair about {Emrakul, the Aeons Torn}. I wouldn't call it a fair matchup but it's not unbeatable. Nearly every color has viable sideboard hate options. I actually like playing against tron.
Quote from: Taysby on February 17, 2015, 01:15:11 PM
Quote from: LinkCelestrial on February 17, 2015, 12:38:49 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 17, 2015, 11:53:24 AM
Would tron be classified as fair? It's just some creatures, walkers, and boardwipes. No combos or anything.
There is nothing fair about {Emrakul, the Aeons Torn}. I wouldn't call it a fair matchup but it's not unbeatable. Nearly every color has viable sideboard hate options. I actually like playing against tron.
Most of the time he doesn't hit though.
It's definitely somewhere in the middle, it is sometimes interactive, but many times it just tries to ramp into {Wurmcoil Engine}s and Eldrazi.
Ari Lax posted a similar article today ( http://www.starcitygames.com/article/30305_Reformatting-Modern.html ) and many other Pros have agreed with PV (Ben Stark, LSV, etc.)
I just accept that "unfair" decks are an inevitable part of competitive play. No rule says your deck has to be a product of your own creation (good luck enforcing it), and with the internet so ready to help, it's easy to find a deck that's nearly unmatched, build it, and call urself a champion.
For those interested, here are Ari Lax's points (pretty well summarized by Ktkenshinx from MTGSal):
1. Combo in Modern is flatter than in Legacy. In Modern, combo decks either win or do something that can't be recovered from by turn 3-4. In Legacy, you have all-in decks that win on turn 1-2, decks that win on turn 3-4, and decks that are built off synergies that are strong throughout the game.
2. BGx has the best tools in Modern. This is similar to a point I often make about how other colors get ***** like Leak/Cryptic Command/Serum Vision whereas BGx have some of the best answers in existence in Decay, TS, and IoK.
3. Banning things is bad. You have to ban way too much to stop combo and you can't ban BGx cards without screwing the format (COMBO EVERYWHERE) or screwing players.
4. Reprints are good! Bring back card advantage that BGx can't answer 1 for 1, like Accumulate Knowledge, Deep Analysis, etc. Bring back engines that don't go into BGx decks, like Tranquil Thicket cycling lands, Tangle Wire, Destructive Flow, etc.
5. New cards are good! Make combo more interactive, make decks that can beat BGx, make cards that don't just slot into BGx.
6. Bypassing Standard can be good! Modern Masters can feed cards into Modern without going through Standard, at least if Wizards wanted to use it like that.
7. Unbans might be good. Sword will help but might not be enough. AV and DTT are great options, with AV being more likely even if it's less "fun" to play against control/midrange hybrids with Flash threats like Faeries and UWR Flash. JTMS interesting but big supply problems.
That's the point of Modern though isn't it? If you want to always play vs non combo then standard is always there :P but for strong decks that have a lot of synergy and good deck building that's where Modern comes in. It's where every deck is unfair which makes them all fair!
Twin can win T4 with an infi combo= Unfair
Burn can punish the smallest of hesitation and win T3= Unfair
Junk Rhino being able to destroy your hand and slam a Rhino T3 = Unfair
RG Ramp being able to bust out a T3 Emrakul = unfair
Scapeshift being able to ramp up and cast a T4 backed up Scapeshift = unfair
Affinity ... No explanation needed = unfair
Every deck is unfair in Modern but that's what makes it sweet. Also just bc of the God draws for each deck is unfair doesn't mean anything there's plenty of games where the game is slow and plenty if games where Twin doesn't win T4.
Having said all this I'm a huge believer in unbanning BBE and JtMS and Visions
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 17, 2015, 04:29:41 PM
That's the point of Modern though isn't it? If you want to always play vs non combo then standard is always there :P but for strong decks that have a lot of synergy and good deck building that's where Modern comes in. It's where every deck is unfair which makes them all fair!
Twin can win T4 with an infi combo= Unfair
Burn can punish the smallest of hesitation and win T3= Unfair
Junk Rhino being able to destroy your hand and slam a Rhino T3 = Unfair
RG Ramp being able to bust out a T3 Emrakul = unfair
Scapeshift being able to ramp up and cast a T4 backed up Scapeshift = unfair
Affinity ... No explanation needed = unfair
Every deck is unfair in Modern but that's what makes it sweet. Also just bc of the God draws for each deck is unfair doesn't mean anything there's plenty of games where the game is slow and plenty if games where Twin doesn't win T4.
Having said all this I'm a huge believer in unbanning BBE and JtMS and Visions
The big point he is making is that there are too many combo decks that require you to have specific sideboard cards and not enough "fair decks." By "fair decks" he means non-linear decks and non-interactive decks, so even Twin and Junk are probably considered "fair." What he wants is fewer games of "lose game one, hope to find {Rule of Law}/{Leyline of Sanctity}/{Kor Firewalker}/{Rest in Peace}/{Spellskite}/etc. for games 2 and 3" Magic. Basically he wants more interactive matchups, he isn't complaining about the powerlevel of Modern.
I'm just gonna say that to me it seems very worthwhile for wizards to test out the format with unbans. I'm going to try to do my own research on this topic.
Hey guys, the discussion about PV's and Ari Lax's articles have been a little more....lively and constructive on other sites, but I want to make sure we get as many people to answer this poll as we can:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/596765-how-to-fix-modern
Idk. Id love to have skullclamp. But everyone treats it like a black nazi
I could just imagine skullclamp in token decks. Tokens already been getting a lot of love....don't think they need that much power. Skullclamp would not be so bad if it did not insta-kill 1 toughness creatures
That was the oversight in design that deserves it to be a permanent-ban
Quote from: cltrn81 on February 17, 2015, 06:24:14 PM
I could just imagine skullclamp in token decks. Tokens already been getting a lot of love....don't think they need that much power. Skullclamp would not be so bad if it did not insta-kill 1 toughness creatures
That was the oversight in design that deserves it to be a permanent-ban
If it wasn't for tokens, it wouldn't be that bad. Idk i had a killer skullclamp deck when the Mirrodin cycle came out. That was before i knew anything about the online community, or the banned list. I just bought cards and stomped my friends. Honestly, I still think the BR list is a joke, but oh well.
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:19:17 PM
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
There is a time and place for that type of magic. This is discussing truly competitive magic. Your statement compares apples to oranges my friend.
Quote from: cltrn81 on February 17, 2015, 10:25:39 PM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:19:17 PM
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
There is a time and place for that type of magic. This is discussing truly competitive magic. Your statement compares apples to oranges my friend.
I see your point, but Magic is supposed to be FUN. Why do you play competitive Magic? Because it is fun. If you are just grinding for points or packs or whatever you are missing half of the experience. I play at my LGS because I have made friends there and we help with each other's decks. We want to win; whether we play each other or someone else. Unfair decks are not always conducive to growing the community.
Quote from: Taysby on February 17, 2015, 09:43:21 PM
http://www.channelfireball.com/home/leave-modern-alone/
I strongly disagree with most of what was said. Blue decks, (except for twin,) have pretty much faded out of modern currently. Abzan is crushing most other decks like a steam roller, and Twin is now a large part of the meta. This modern format currently is anything but "healthy," and something needs to change.
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: cltrn81 on February 17, 2015, 10:25:39 PM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:19:17 PM
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
There is a time and place for that type of magic. This is discussing truly competitive magic. Your statement compares apples to oranges my friend.
I see your point, but Magic is supposed to be FUN. Why do you play competitive Magic? Because it is fun. If you are just grinding for points or packs or whatever you are missing half of the experience. I play at my LGS because I have made friends there and we help with each other's decks. We want to win; whether we play each other or someone else. Unfair decks are not always conducive to growing the community.
Some of these are 50,000$ competitions or more sometimes.
Quote from: Distriimuir on February 18, 2015, 01:08:59 AM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: cltrn81 on February 17, 2015, 10:25:39 PM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:19:17 PM
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
There is a time and place for that type of magic. This is discussing truly competitive magic. Your statement compares apples to oranges my friend.
I see your point, but Magic is supposed to be FUN. Why do you play competitive Magic? Because it is fun. If you are just grinding for points or packs or whatever you are missing half of the experience. I play at my LGS because I have made friends there and we help with each other's decks. We want to win; whether we play each other or someone else. Unfair decks are not always conducive to growing the community.
Some of these are 50,000$ competitions or more sometimes.
Some competitions are very competitive with big cash prizes. The overwhelming majority of modern is not. Are we saying what is good for some is good for all? In order for there to be big competitions you need a larger player base; will that grow and develop if people do not see it as a "fair" competition?
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 18, 2015, 07:27:16 AM
Quote from: Distriimuir on February 18, 2015, 01:08:59 AM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:52:02 PM
Quote from: cltrn81 on February 17, 2015, 10:25:39 PM
Quote from: Dmreiss on February 17, 2015, 10:19:17 PM
I play Magic to have fun and social interaction. When I play against an unfair deck I get cheated on both counts. I don't want to sit down across from somebody and watch them play their deck and be so wrapped up in winning and storm counts, etc. that they cannot carry on a conversation.
There is a time and place for that type of magic. This is discussing truly competitive magic. Your statement compares apples to oranges my friend.
I see your point, but Magic is supposed to be FUN. Why do you play competitive Magic? Because it is fun. If you are just grinding for points or packs or whatever you are missing half of the experience. I play at my LGS because I have made friends there and we help with each other's decks. We want to win; whether we play each other or someone else. Unfair decks are not always conducive to growing the community.
Some of these are 50,000$ competitions or more sometimes.
Some competitions are very competitive with big cash prizes. The overwhelming majority of modern is not. Are we saying what is good for some is good for all? In order for there to be big competitions you need a larger player base; will that grow and develop if people do not see it as a "fair" competition?
Its also important to note that the lack of "fair" decks is something that bothers people at all levels, as evident by Ari Lax's and PV's articles. The fix here is probably a complex one but giving control decks tools like {Ancestral Vision}, {Complicate}, and {Prohibit} could go a long way.
Or make people cry about that.
There is no way to make everyone happy. Keep the control bans, blue controllers will be mad. Unban them, the shock decks will be mad. No matter what, someone is gonna be mad
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Ya bc this makes sense ...
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Sir, as a control player, this is actually kind of offensive. And you really done nothing but make these type of comments this entire thread, and haven't really proven a point.
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on February 18, 2015, 06:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Sir, as a control player, this is actually kind of offensive. And you really done nothing but make these type of comments this entire thread, and haven't really proven a point.
Delver isn't control...
Quote from: DimirOverlord1300 on February 18, 2015, 08:26:35 PM
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on February 18, 2015, 06:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Sir, as a control player, this is actually kind of offensive. And you really done nothing but make these type of comments this entire thread, and haven't really proven a point.
Delver isn't control...
Delver is the only non-control deck I've ever played friend.
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on February 18, 2015, 10:05:46 PM
Quote from: DimirOverlord1300 on February 18, 2015, 08:26:35 PM
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on February 18, 2015, 06:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Sir, as a control player, this is actually kind of offensive. And you really done nothing but make these type of comments this entire thread, and haven't really proven a point.
Delver isn't control...
Delver is the only non-control deck I've ever played friend.
Alright fair enough
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 06:38:16 PM
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on February 18, 2015, 06:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wizardmook on February 18, 2015, 04:12:55 PM
Especially control players, massive whiners
Sir, as a control player, this is actually kind of offensive. And you really done nothing but make these type of comments this entire thread, and haven't really proven a point.
If you truly find this offensive you need to get out more. I have disagreed with the main poster and represent the side that disagrees with your argument in general. I have made valid points and not been swept up on silly pro adulation.
Maybe you should give some of those points rather than just insulting people, like I have suggested from your first post.
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I'd prefer to to see better LD/punisher cards for non-basics, but I agree that we should be promoting fair decks through unbannings (control, tempo, and non-GBx midrange).
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I didn't play much with {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} But I think he is broken unless his 0 is changed to a -1 or-2. Just how I see it
I doubt that we will get any Land Destruction bc it creates an "unfun" play style. Sure in comp. games fun is second to winning but wizards doesn't like cheap land demo stuff. Even if they did land demo can be tough to build bc you're banking on then not flooding out
{Stifle}
Maybe add that to modern
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:33:09 PM
{Stifle}
Maybe add that to modern
That'd be cool and I wouldn't mind it tbh it's a cheap spell that isn't OP
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:27:41 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I didn't play much with {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} But I think he is broken unless his 0 is changed to a -1 or-2. Just how I see it
Nah, when you play him if you 0, it was an expensive {Brainstorm} because he is left vulnerable at 3 loyalty. Also, tapping out on turn four for Jace isn't nearly as bad as Twin just straight up winning on turn four... I have played with him, and while he is really good, I don't think he is that broken, he'd mostly just be a control finisher, maybe a toy for Scapeshift.
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:34:24 PM
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:33:09 PM
{Stifle}
Maybe add that to modern
That'd be cool and I wouldn't mind it tbh it's a cheap spell that isn't OP
We have Trickbind already
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 12:15:29 AM
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:27:41 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I didn't play much with {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} But I think he is broken unless his 0 is changed to a -1 or-2. Just how I see it
Nah, when you play him if you 0, it was an expensive {Brainstorm} because he is left vulnerable at 3 loyalty. Also, tapping out on turn four for Jace isn't nearly as bad as Twin just straight up winning on turn four... I have played with him, and while he is really good, I don't think he is that broken, he'd mostly just be a control finisher, maybe a toy for Scapeshift.
The problem with JTMS is not that he's an expensive brainstorm, it's that he's a repeatable brainstorm, a fateseal when your opponent is mana starved/flooded, and a tempo play if you're in dire straights all for the one time cost of 4 mana. Each of those things on their own are not insanely broken, but significantly strong, and his utility is the key.
That being said, I truly love the card and want to see it unbanned. :P I'm just under no illusion that the card would be fair, especially in the world of fetches.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 12:15:29 AM
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:27:41 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I didn't play much with {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} But I think he is broken unless his 0 is changed to a -1 or-2. Just how I see it
Nah, when you play him if you 0, it was an expensive {Brainstorm} because he is left vulnerable at 3 loyalty. Also, tapping out on turn four for Jace isn't nearly as bad as Twin just straight up winning on turn four... I have played with him, and while he is really good, I don't think he is that broken, he'd mostly just be a control finisher, maybe a toy for Scapeshift.
I don't see it. Your not dropping jace if you can't protect him. And if you are your already in bad shape so it may by you some time. And getting three new cards can have a big effect( yea you have to put two back but they could be cards from your hand). Drawing 6% of your deck is always nice. Especially if after you top off two useless cards and crack a fetch to possibly burry them.
Quote from: Rass on February 19, 2015, 10:58:48 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 12:15:29 AM
Quote from: Rass on February 18, 2015, 11:27:41 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on February 18, 2015, 11:12:16 PM
Just watched Channel Fireball and their thoughts on modern and well I agree with them on this ...
Ban Fetches! Mana in Modern is too easy and shuffling takes so effing long (seriously though)
Also unban cards that go into fairish deck JtMS helps the control decks and BBE helps the Jund ones
I didn't play much with {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} But I think he is broken unless his 0 is changed to a -1 or-2. Just how I see it
Nah, when you play him if you 0, it was an expensive {Brainstorm} because he is left vulnerable at 3 loyalty. Also, tapping out on turn four for Jace isn't nearly as bad as Twin just straight up winning on turn four... I have played with him, and while he is really good, I don't think he is that broken, he'd mostly just be a control finisher, maybe a toy for Scapeshift.
I don't see it. Your not dropping jace if you can't protect him. And if you are your already in bad shape so it may by you some time. And getting three new cards can have a big effect( yea you have to put two back but they could be cards from your hand). Drawing 6% of your deck is always nice. Especially if after you top off two useless cards and crack a fetch to possibly burry them.
If you are waiting to play it until you have protection, you aren't dropping him until turn 6, and honestly there are a lot better things you could be doing at that point (like win with {Scapeshift}). Also, the big power of {Brainstorm} is it being instant speed, where as {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} isn't.
Quote from: Taysby on February 19, 2015, 11:52:50 AM
{cryptic command} makes it into almost every blue deck, jace would be worse. it'd be {treasure cruise} all over again, and we all know how much you don't like that agrus. ;)
{Treasure Cruise} was a cheap, powerful draw spell that took very little to set up. Jace is a 4 drop without a cost reduction ability. There is a HUGE difference. For one, {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} wouldn't fit into combo decks where as {Treasure Cruise} did. {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} wouldn't fit into Delver and other tempo decks. {Jace, the Mind Sculptor} really only fits into combo-control and control, so it is not nearly as powerful. If you want to complain about "making it into almost every blue deck," maybe we should ban {Serum Visions} or {Mana Leak}
Quote from: Taysby on February 19, 2015, 03:27:42 PM
You really missed my intentions with that Argus. Power level aside, Treasure cruise was format warping. Jace would probably be more so.
I really don't think it would. There are lots of decks that can go underneath it (Affinity, Burn, Zoo, etc.), and Rock decks would still thrive with Jace in the format. I really think people are afraid of a Caw-Blade 2, but that obviously wouldn't happen.
Edit: here is a quick experiment that I think could put this to rest, develop what you think would be the most potent JTMS deck and then test it against burn, affinity, Junk and the other tier one decks. I bet it isn't as powerful as you think it is.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 04:09:55 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 19, 2015, 03:27:42 PM
You really missed my intentions with that Argus. Power level aside, Treasure cruise was format warping. Jace would probably be more so.
Edit: here is a quick experiment that I think could put this to rest, develop what you think would be the most potent JTMS deck and then test it against burn, affinity, Junk and the other tier one decks. I bet it isn't as powerful as you think it is.
I think it has been that's why it's banned.
Your losing jace gives you a chance to grab a card or three to get back in. Also now it's another target they need to focus on
It's a close game jace gives you at least a card advantage every turn with no negative.
Your winning jace lets you just cruse to the end.
When he's on the board against you if your not winning next turn you gotta get rid of him
Quote from: Rass on February 19, 2015, 04:31:14 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 04:09:55 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 19, 2015, 03:27:42 PM
You really missed my intentions with that Argus. Power level aside, Treasure cruise was format warping. Jace would probably be more so.
Edit: here is a quick experiment that I think could put this to rest, develop what you think would be the most potent JTMS deck and then test it against burn, affinity, Junk and the other tier one decks. I bet it isn't as powerful as you think it is.
I think it has been that's why it's banned.
Your losing jace gives you a chance to grab a card or three to get back in. Also now it's another target they need to focus on
It's a close game jace gives you at least a card advantage every turn with no negative.
Your winning jace lets you just cruse to the end.
When he's on the board against you if your not winning next turn you gotta get rid of him
Again, put him in a deck and test him, he isn't as good as many people think. People are just obviously biased against him and have PTSD from Caw-Blade standard.
All they need to do now is make a Jace with a 0 cost {skullclamp} ability, and make it useable as many times as you want in a turn.
Oh yea forgot the miracles also put jace over the edge.
"The problem with modern is all the good cards your opponents use. "
Well that's how I see it sometimes. 😜😜😜
Jace, the Sentient
0- Jace, the Sentient gains Autonomy (This card gains free will and movement, and is able to legally petition for rights as a sentient being), conjures a deck comprised of Banned cards, and enters the game as an additional player. Jace, the Sentient starts with 40 life, searches his library for 10 lands of any kind, puts them into play, searches his library for 7 cards and puts them into his hand, and then puts the remainder of his library in any order. His turn begins after yours, and he remains in this place in the turn rotation.
I give it 3 core sets before we see this card.
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 19, 2015, 06:22:49 PM
Jace, the Sentient
0- Jace, the Sentient gains Autonomy (This card gains free will and movement, and is able to legally petition for rights as a sentient being), conjures a deck comprised of Banned cards, and enters the game as an additional player. Jace, the Sentient starts with 40 life, searches his library for 10 lands of any kind, puts them into play, searches his library for 7 cards and puts them into his hand, and then puts the remainder of his library in any order. His turn begins after yours, and he remains in this place in the turn rotation.
I give it 3 core sets before we see this card.
Dude there is only one more Core Set, so I will bet anything you are wrong.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 06:30:13 PM
Dude there is only one more Core Set, so I will bet anything you are wrong.
Thank you, Argus, that was a big part of the joke.
Quote from: Dsx Cherno on February 19, 2015, 06:34:07 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 19, 2015, 06:30:13 PM
Dude there is only one more Core Set, so I will bet anything you are wrong.
Thank you, Argus, that was a big part of the joke.
When you seriously say stuff like Skullclamp is a fair card for modern, it's hard to know when you are joking.
I said I love it I didn't say it was fair
The reason jace (and any card for that matter) gets banned is because you get too much out of it for too little investment (which is, in short, unfair) and it goes against what wizards wants for the format in question. Sonetimes this can seem quite arbitrary, and that is wotc's prerogative. Whether it is format warping or not is not the only consideration. I believe people need to suck it up and deal with it, or play a different format. Sure, have your say. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But there is no need (and nothing to be gained by) continuously harping on about it.
Quote from: Mr_Fahrenheit on February 19, 2015, 09:23:14 PM
The reason jace (and any card for that matter) gets banned is because you get too much out of it for too little investment (which is, in short, unfair) and it goes against what wizards wants for the format in question. Sonetimes this can seem quite arbitrary, and that is wotc's prerogative. Whether it is format warping or not is not the only consideration. I believe people need to suck it up and deal with it, or play a different format. Sure, have your say. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But there is no need (and nothing to be gained by) continuously harping on about it.
Except Jace was a pre-format ban which have been overturned because they were wrong ({Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle} and {Bitterblossom}) and Wizards does listen to the community when thinking about bans. You don't have to engage in the discussion, but you shouldn't discourage it. Bans are not absolute, we just had {Golgari Grave-Troll} come off.
Im not discouraging discussion. I just feel a lot of it is superfluous. We need to remember that wizards feels strongly about jace. He was banned from his own standard dont forget. While i wouldn't mind brewing with jace in modern i am happy enough that he is banned. Do i think he will ever get unbanned in modern? No. Would it bother me if it was? No. Im quite neutral in this argument.
There was a deck on Tapped out that used all of the cards banned in modern and it was really quite good. There was no real synergy, but the deck won anyway. There's a reason why those cards were banned.
But about the fairness thing, pretty much all formats grow stagnant eventually until a new set comes out.
I know this discussion is stale, but I have two suggestions for fixing "unfair" decks:
1) Have ban lists include combinations of cards. Example: You can play card A, B, and/or C, but A cannot be in a deck with B nor C.
2) Triggered abilities from cannot be added to the stack when they're already on the stack unless the source of the trigger is different. Example: {Boros Reckoner} can be given Indestructible and Lifelink then can damaged by you to redirecting the damage to itself giving you life. Then, it can redirect the damage to another creature or player, but not itself.
I like #2 because I really hate losing to ad nauseam combos that require very little effort/luck. Another advantage to #2 is that it stops combos that you try to stop but your opponent just perpetuates the combo on top of your counter when priority passes back to him/her. I mean, putting {Aura of Dominion} on {King Macar, the Gold-Cursed} results in an ad nauseam combo that doesn't require multi-stacking triggered abilities, but combos like that could be addressed by idea #1.
They're not going to ban combinations of cards. That's overly complicated and kinda silly.
"You can use bounce lands but not with {Summer Bloom}."
Why not just ban {Summer Bloom}? I mean what is it being used in that warrants it not being banned outright? Nothing justifies over complicating the rules.
2) isn't worded to produce the outcome that you have in your example. Things not being trigger able unless they're not on the stack doesn't really change anything...either way they're not going to change the rules of the game to stop combo decks when combo decks are already a thing that they're more than fine with.
They are interesting ideas and they really could work. They're just not going to happen because they're adding a level of complication to remove an element of the game that Wizards is fine with.
Quote from: GlowackAttack on June 17, 2015, 06:25:43 PM
They can't just change the rules and way things work man. You can't add things like.. "You can run Fastbond as long as you don't do more than 3 lands a turn with it" magic isn't a game of politeness and other grey areas, its black and white and definitive rules. Hahaha
I don't know, their playgroup, their rules :P seems like the point of a game is to have fun, however you decide to do so. I guess you could think of it like playing a made up game that's similar to magic plus a few rules if you like...
My playgroup allows any Planeswalker as a commander for EDH. However {Sorin Markov} sets life totals to 20. There's no {Karn Liberated} here (thankfully) so it's been pretty tame so far.
All this to say I like house rules.